<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (2) TMI 1130 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449979</link>
    <description>In a matrimonial-dispute prosecution over a minor child&#039;s passport, the SC held that cheating under Section 420 IPC was not prima facie made out because the record showed no dishonest inducement, parting of property or valuable security, or tangible loss. It further held that forgery and use of forged document under Sections 468 and 471 IPC were not established even prima facie, as the forensic material was inconclusive and the private opinion lacked corroboration. The ingredients of Section 12(b) of the Passports Act were likewise absent. The Court found the prosecution an abuse of process and quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Feb 2024 06:28:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=744680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1130 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449979</link>
      <description>In a matrimonial-dispute prosecution over a minor child&#039;s passport, the SC held that cheating under Section 420 IPC was not prima facie made out because the record showed no dishonest inducement, parting of property or valuable security, or tangible loss. It further held that forgery and use of forged document under Sections 468 and 471 IPC were not established even prima facie, as the forensic material was inconclusive and the private opinion lacked corroboration. The ingredients of Section 12(b) of the Passports Act were likewise absent. The Court found the prosecution an abuse of process and quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449979</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>